The Legal Primacy of Sex
This from the court that blazed the path of determining that the word “marriage” can’t mean, in the law, what it’s always been known to mean:
Matt Zubiel of Beverly was arrested in 2006 after driving to Marshfield to meet with the girl, who really was a Plymouth County Deputy Sheriff, authorities said. The next year, he was convicted of four counts of attempting to disseminate harmful material to a minor.
But in his appeal, Zubiel argued that the “harmful material” banned under the law didn’t include sexually explicit instant messages, and the Supreme Judicial Court agreed on Feb. 5. …
In his appeal, Zubiel argued that though the law listed more than a dozen examples of the obscene “matter” that adults can’t give to minors, it didn’t include instant messages.
Look, this appears to have been the correct ruling, according to the law, and we can take some comfort in the fact that the arrest was based on a sting, not an actual attempt to abuse a minor, and now the law will likely be updated. But doesn’t seem as if the decisions always break in a particular direction when courts decide how literally to take the law?